• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump, Rubio and the Republican Establishment’s Tragedy of the Commons

OpportunityCost said:
We aren't deporting ANY now--catch and release is policy again.

He asked for a temporary stop on immigration from Muslim majority countries where all the fighting is occurring.

It doesn't matter who pays for the wall, we have bigger concerns than JUST immigration to alleviate. Terror and drug and crime concerns being chief amongst them.

I'm not even sure who I'm voting for yet, but don't try to snow me with low information voter bull****, I have been following the election.
Click to expand...

Your post is paranoid if you think what I posted was directed at you. I don't even know who you are let alone who you're voting for. I responded to the content of your post. If you took it personally, that's on you.
 
calamity said:
Sanders has no chance. From here on out it will be Hillary then Sanders. Sanders was just a distraction, a shiny object for the Millennials to focus on. Hillary owns the white working class vote and the minority vote and the vote of almost anyone over the age 40. Bernie gets the fringe and the youth...which is not much.

As for the GOP. Trump and Cruz will finish 1-2 in SC. That race will be the God Squad versus the pissed off people. Rubio will either finish a distant third or fall to fourth or fifth again. He may actually fold his tent if he also has a poor showing in Nevada.
Click to expand...

You willing to bet your house on that statement about Sanders, calamity?

The youth helped give Obama the win - twice. I will never underestimate the impact of the youth. You are right that Hillary has the minority vote edge, but apparently Sanders is focusing on that now. He's on his way to Harlem to suck up to Al Sharpton.
 
justabubba said:
not sure i agree with your prediction
there are about the same number of republicans opposed to trump as those who support him
while there is a bevvy of republican prospects in the running, trump's support, consisting of more than one-third of the republicans, appears dominant
however, once the competition is winnowed down to two options, those who now spread their opposing ballots for other candidates will consolidate them behind the other non-trump republican candidate
hopefully, the sane republicans realize what a laughingstock their party will become if it nominates trump as its presidential candidate
Click to expand...

I believe the problem is that the "winnowing down" has no one with the star power who can eclipse Trump or Cruz. That's why the establishment is toast.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Yes you can - see congress with its re-election rate of over 90%.
Click to expand...

the same but different: 'the education system sucks. my kids' school is great'

and to complete the circle: 'our political system is broken. vote for trump'
 
tres borrachos said:
You willing to bet your house on that statement about Sanders, calamity?
Click to expand...
yes

The youth helped give Obama the win - twice. I will never underestimate the impact of the youth. You are right that Hillary has the minority vote edge, but apparently Sanders is focusing on that now. He's on his way to Harlem to suck up to Al Sharpton.
Click to expand...
Obama had the Black vote. Sanders does not. I believe Hillary via Bill has already bought Al.
 
justabubba said:
the same but different: 'the education system sucks. my kids' school is great'

and to complete the circle: 'our political system is broken. vote for trump'
Click to expand...

If (and not likely when) Trump can articulate a viable plan to improve the US economy (other than blaming all ills on immigration policy and "bad" trade deals) then maybe I would vote for Trump. Trump (so far) has attained support from a "majority" of about 30% of repubiicant primary voters. As more republicant POTUS hopefulls drop out then we will see who their prior supporters go for. Placing a tax (of 35%?) on (Chinese?) imports would not create many US jobs but would immediately decrease the buying power of all US low wage workers. Increased US maufacturing will not do one bit of good for low wage US service workers.
 
tres borrachos said:
Your post is paranoid if you think what I posted was directed at you. I don't even know who you are let alone who you're voting for. I responded to the content of your post. If you took it personally, that's on you.
Click to expand...

Nope, I just dislike disinformation, which your post was full of. You asked why establishment candidates were having trouble and I told you and you jumped straight to the establishment spin on Trump speeches with a real disregard for what he actually said. I informed you I wasn't sure who I was voting for, but I do not buy the spin on candidate quotes, I go and read what they actually said.

I will re-iterate, establishment candidates are having trouble because the republican establishment had tremendous victories in 2010 and 2014 and did not vote based on what they ran on. Its an outsider year due to anger at Washington from both the left and the right, because the center has been screwing their constituents on both sides pretty regularly.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Nope, I just dislike disinformation, which your post was full of. You asked why establishment candidates were having trouble and I told you and you jumped straight to the establishment spin on Trump speeches with a real disregard for what he actually said. I informed you I wasn't sure who I was voting for, but I do not buy the spin on candidate quotes, I go and read what they actually said.

I will re-iterate, establishment candidates are having trouble because the republican establishment had tremendous victories in 2010 and 2014 and did not vote based on what they ran on. Its an outsider year due to anger at Washington from both the left and the right, because the center has been screwing their constituents on both sides pretty regularly.
Click to expand...

I understand now. You didn't see the first 2 words of my response to you which said "That's true". Which by the way, meant I agreed with what you said, which also means you could have saved yourself the typing of "re-iterating" what you said that I already agreed with.

You say my post is "full of disinformation". Okay, you think it's easy for President Trump to round up and deport 12 million people, get another country to cut a check for a wall, and decide to randomly ban people of a certain religion from coming into this country. I don't. And the "establishment" (I love how people adore that term) has nothing to do with it. See, I pay attention to reality. Barack Obama couldn't even get Gitmo closed, 7 full years after he swore he would do it. The Republicans who control the House and the Senate can't get the ACA repealed, even after 60 odd votes on it and vehement promises to their constituents. Color me skeptical. You want to have full faith in Trump, be my guest. But don't get all paranoid every time someone like me says what he is promising to his supporters won't happen. I said the same thing about Barack Obama in 2008. I was right.
 
tres borrachos said:
Carson has zero chance, if you actually paid attention to what happened yesterday.
Click to expand...
I paid attention. I wasn't commenting on the NH result, but on what a hypothetical nomination of any one of three moonbats would say about the Republican party.

He never did.
Click to expand...
Well he did a few months ago when he was running second to Trump.

If all you know about Rubio is where his family came from, a little education will help you.
Click to expand...
I know more than that. I know he lied about his family's migration. I know that he's a horrible debater who can't handle it when his soundbites fall flat. I know that he's a flip-flopper - going from proposing to limit carbon emissions, to denying the science of climate change just 3 years later. I know that he promised immigration reform when he entered Congress in 2010, but has so far not done a thing about it. What I don't know about him is whether he's a Mormon, a Catholic or a Southern Baptist, but then, he doesn't seem very sure on that point either.

Lots of people in this country support Cruz.
Click to expand...
Yes, about 15% of Republicans seem to. He's still a moonbat to the vast majority though.

That is no more comical than people supporting Sanders ("I'll give you lots of free stuff!") or Clinton ("Vote for me because I have a vagina!").
Click to expand...
Not to you, I'm sure, but let us know when Bernie or Hillary comes out with something as ludicrously insane as this whilst discussing healthcare reforms:

If you go to the 1940s, Nazi Germany. Look, we saw in Britain, Neville Chamberlain, who told the British people, "Accept the Nazis. Yes, they'll dominate the continent of Europe but that's not our problem. Let's appease them. Why? Because it can't be done. We can't possibly stand against them."
Click to expand...
 
calamity said:
yes


Obama had the Black vote. Sanders does not. I believe Hillary via Bill has already bought Al.
Click to expand...

The black vote isn't going to be nearly as strong as it was in '08 or '12 though. I'd be surprised if there's 2/3 of the turnout from Obamas elections.

And if Bernie is going to be criticized for "all the free stuff", he should be able to benefit from it as well. Isn't that why so many minorities vote D?
 
tres borrachos said:
I understand now. You didn't see the first 2 words of my response to you which said "That's true". Which by the way, meant I agreed with what you said, which also means you could have saved yourself the typing of "re-iterating" what you said that I already agreed with.

You say my post is "full of disinformation". Okay, you think it's easy for President Trump to round up and deport 12 million people, get another country to cut a check for a wall, and decide to randomly ban people of a certain religion from coming into this country. I don't. And the "establishment" (I love how people adore that term) has nothing to do with it. See, I pay attention to reality. Barack Obama couldn't even get Gitmo closed, 7 full years after he swore he would do it. The Republicans who control the House and the Senate can't get the ACA repealed, even after 60 odd votes on it and vehement promises to their constituents. Color me skeptical. You want to have full faith in Trump, be my guest. But don't get all paranoid every time someone like me says what he is promising to his supporters won't happen. I said the same thing about Barack Obama in 2008. I was right.
Click to expand...

/facepalm

1. Right now we aren't deporting any illegals. Maybe we should just enforce current laws.
2. We need to build the wall whether Mexico pays for it or not and not just for illegal immigration. Ain't not way Mexico will pay for that. Agreed.
3. He never said BAN. He said 6 months delay to set up a better vetting process.

I don't have full faith in Trump. But I'm not misrepresenting what he said either.
 
OpportunityCost said:
/facepalm

1. Right now we aren't deporting any illegals. Maybe we should just enforce current laws.
2. We need to build the wall whether Mexico pays for it or not and not just for illegal immigration. Ain't not way Mexico will pay for that. Agreed.
3. He never said BAN. He said 6 months delay to set up a better vetting process.

I don't have full faith in Trump. But I'm not misrepresenting what he said either.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, I'm sorry. Just a 6 month ban on people of a random religion from coming in while we figure out a better way to keep people of said random religion from coming in. That will be quite easy to get in place.

You forgot to mention how he said he would round up and deport illegals. I believe there are about 12 million of them, Not sure why you had to mention - again - that we aren't deporting illegals (although that isn't exactly true as some have been deported by the current and previous administration). Nobody is arguing that illegals aren't a problem, including me. I'm arguing about Trump's completely unrealistic solution to the problem, not the problem.

You do need to give yourself a facepalm. You are not paying attention to my posts which have you all worked up.
 
Andalublue said:
I paid attention. I wasn't commenting on the NH result, but on what a hypothetical nomination of any one of three moonbats would say about the Republican party.

Well he did a few months ago when he was running second to Trump.

I know more than that. I know he lied about his family's migration. I know that he's a horrible debater who can't handle it when his soundbites fall flat. I know that he's a flip-flopper - going from proposing to limit carbon emissions, to denying the science of climate change just 3 years later. I know that he promised immigration reform when he entered Congress in 2010, but has so far not done a thing about it. What I don't know about him is whether he's a Mormon, a Catholic or a Southern Baptist, but then, he doesn't seem very sure on that point either.

Yes, about 15% of Republicans seem to. He's still a moonbat to the vast majority though.

Not to you, I'm sure, but let us know when Bernie or Hillary comes out with something as ludicrously insane as this whilst discussing healthcare reforms:
Click to expand...

Not a clue what your last point was, or who said that quote you quoted. I'm not arguing in favor of any candidate. I'm saying you don't even know what those GOP candidates have said to voters. I see, and I'm not alone, people on the Democratic side saying dumb things as well that are exactly like what I said, and event idiots like Madeline Albright back up those dumb Hillary comments and innuendos, and a whole lot of voters think Bernie will give them free stuff. So it's on both sides. I've heard both of them say nutty things just as I've heard the GOP candidates say nutty things.

You don't like Cruz. That's fine. I didn't vote for him and I suspect you won't either. And I live in NH...Carson hasn't been second in the polls to Trump in a few months. Nobody who has been paying attention thought he had a real chance.
 
OpportunityCost said:
We aren't deporting ANY now--catch and release is policy again.

He asked for a temporary stop on immigration from Muslim majority countries where all the fighting is occurring.

It doesn't matter who pays for the wall, we have bigger concerns than JUST immigration to alleviate. Terror and drug and crime concerns being chief amongst them.

I'm not even sure who I'm voting for yet, but don't try to snow me with low information voter bull****, I have been following the election.
Click to expand...

The fact that you would respond to tres' reasonable prediction about what would happen if Trump's policy proposals met with congress and the senate with a "don't give me low information bull****" does not bode well for your ability to follow the election.
 
jimbo said:
"Most certainly" are strong words, and probably erroneous. Keep in mind that as usual this election will noil down to the least worst candidate. Throw out the felon, the socialist, the theocrats, and the establishment, and you're left with Trump.
Click to expand...

the racist, xenophobic, sexist, egomaniac?
 
OpportunityCost said:
/facepalm

1. Right now we aren't deporting any illegals. Maybe we should just enforce current laws.
2. We need to build the wall whether Mexico pays for it or not and not just for illegal immigration. Ain't not way Mexico will pay for that. Agreed.
3. He never said BAN. He said 6 months delay to set up a better vetting process.

I don't have full faith in Trump. But I'm not misrepresenting what he said either.
Click to expand...

Why do you keep repeating this false claim about the United States not deporting anyone? First off, "deported" is an outdated term. If you are referencing "removals," then there were 235,000 in FY 2015, 315,000 in FY 2014, and 368,000 in FY 2013.

As for the notion that a temporary stay on muslim immigration is not the same as a ban, you're splitting hairs. The policy is still absurd and would be incredibly damaging to both our international reputation and our ability to actually stop terrorist attacks from occurring.
 
calamity said:
Here's a very interesting perspective of the GOP's "Trump problem."



IMO, it goes deeper than that...but not by much. What I see their problem to be is that too many GOP voters are more concerned with ideological purity than actually winning the election. Trump supporters are no exception. The only thing is that with them, the purity they seek from their candidate is a nationalistic hero who pisses on the PC narratives. Not that this is a bad thing...it's just not a winning thing.

The establishment is toast. And, that too is not a bad thing. But, it most certainly will not be a winning ticket in November.
Click to expand...

I suspect that Kasich, Rubio, Bush and Christie all agree that the others should indeed drop out and the center unite around them.

Good article - thanks.
 
tres borrachos said:
Oh yeah, I'm sorry. Just a 6 month ban on people of a random religion from coming in while we figure out a better way to keep people of said random religion from coming in. That will be quite easy to get in place.

You forgot to mention how he said he would round up and deport illegals. I believe there are about 12 million of them, Not sure why you had to mention - again - that we aren't deporting illegals (although that isn't exactly true as some have been deported by the current and previous administration). Nobody is arguing that illegals aren't a problem, including me. I'm arguing about Trump's completely unrealistic solution to the problem, not the problem.

You do need to give yourself a facepalm. You are not paying attention to my posts which have you all worked up.
Click to expand...

Just because its difficult doesn't mean it may not need done-regarding the 6 month ban.

Since we actually have laws on the books about deporting illegals, exactly why aren't we doing it? The actual quote was he "would vacate Obama's executive orders" that are ensuring we don't deport anyone. If we begin deporting and are serious about it, some illegals will deport themselves by leaving and others will not consider the risk of coming her illegally, and they may decide to come here legally. Because we have no policy at all right now, the problem is way out of control. Maybe we should just try enforcing current policy, which is all Trump actually said.

You seem to be going out of your way to frame the discussion a certain way and that way is how other candidates have framed positions. Please go read the actual quotes and position papers. BTW, I'm not going to believe what Jeb says about Carson or what Rubio says about Kasich or what Kasich says about Cruz, Ill go and look at what was actually said. Its certainly not just about Trump.
 
MrT said:
Why do you keep repeating this false claim about the United States not deporting anyone? First off, "deported" is an outdated term. If you are referencing "removals," then there were 235,000 in FY 2015, 315,000 in FY 2014, and 368,000 in FY 2013.

As for the notion that a temporary stay on muslim immigration is not the same as a ban, you're splitting hairs. The policy is still absurd and would be incredibly damaging to both our international reputation and our ability to actually stop terrorist attacks from occurring.
Click to expand...

See the first two words?

Right now

What we are doing right now with Muslim immigrants is we are not vetting them at all. Meaning there is no effort to provide for the safety and security of the country. I argue that policy is absurd and incredibly damaging to our ability to stop terrorist attacks from occurring.
 
calamity said:
I believe the problem is that the "winnowing down" has no one with the star power who can eclipse Trump or Cruz. That's why the establishment is toast.
Click to expand...

Simply, the establishment has ignored the messenger and the message. The establishment R's have ignored the message far too often. Sooner or later the messengers are left with no other means than to toss the lot out.

So to the D's. Do you not find it troubling to be forced to defend someone with Hillary's blatant violation of the law for years? And the corruption that allows her to get by with it?

That Sanders and Trump, neither of which is anybodies ideal candidate, are doing so well is a statement on the present system.
 
jimbo said:
Simply, the establishment has ignored the messenger and the message. The establishment R's have ignored the message far too often. Sooner or later the messengers are left with no other means than to toss the lot out.

So to the D's. Do you not find it troubling to be forced to defend someone with Hillary's blatant violation of the law for years? And the corruption that allows her to get by with it?

That Sanders and Trump, neither of which is anybodies ideal candidate, are doing so well is a statement on the present system.
Click to expand...

I agree that Hillary is baggage laden. But, I have no doubt that she will fight the Republicans to the death, and maybe--just maybe--will have the political strength to push some of her agenda through Congress. Sanders will be more like Obama: a dude with all the right words but no fangs, and zero-chance to pass a goddamned thing.

On the GOP, I totally understand why they are in this mess. They've been dragging red meat through the trailer park for over a decade. The residents are finally sick of just sniffing the bait.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Just because its difficult doesn't mean it may not need done-regarding the 6 month ban.

Since we actually have laws on the books about deporting illegals, exactly why aren't we doing it? The actual quote was he "would vacate Obama's executive orders" that are ensuring we don't deport anyone. If we begin deporting and are serious about it, some illegals will deport themselves by leaving and others will not consider the risk of coming her illegally, and they may decide to come here legally. Because we have no policy at all right now, the problem is way out of control. Maybe we should just try enforcing current policy, which is all Trump actually said.

You seem to be going out of your way to frame the discussion a certain way and that way is how other candidates have framed positions. Please go read the actual quotes and position papers. BTW, I'm not going to believe what Jeb says about Carson or what Rubio says about Kasich or what Kasich says about Cruz, Ill go and look at what was actually said. Its certainly not just about Trump.
Click to expand...

The answer (to the bolded above) is cost. There is no "small government" solution to border or immigration law enforcement. IMHO, the best solution to immigration law enforcement is a federal bounty payable to state/local LEOs that turn over illegal immigrants and those that employ or rent to them to the feds. The idea that 20K border patrol agents (only 40% of the number of federal airport nannies) or 5K ICE agents (only 10% of the number of federal airport nannies) can git-r-done is ridiculous.

It would cost less to give each illegal immigrant a house and a car than to deport them because of the "due process" requirements involved. We must fix the fact that there are jobs that US citzens will not do, primarily because the "safety net" pays more than those jobs do and also because we refuse to fund enforcement of current immigration law. So long as the median income in Mexico (and many other nations) is less than half what a full time, US minimum wage job pays we will have economic "refugees".
 
OpportunityCost said:
See the first two words?

Right now

What we are doing right now with Muslim immigrants is we are not vetting them at all. Meaning there is no effort to provide for the safety and security of the country. I argue that policy is absurd and incredibly damaging to our ability to stop terrorist attacks from occurring.
Click to expand...

That allegation is just fundamentally inaccurate. Anyone seeking refuge goes through a rigorous vetting process. Anyone seeking a Visa goes through a rigorous vetting process. Illegal immigrants are detained and go through rigorous legal process before being returned or removed.
 
tres borrachos said:
It would be silly for any of those 3 to drop out now. This is an election cycle like none we've ever seen.
Click to expand...

LOL...says the woman who in another thread this morning said that Rubio should drop out and wait for another 4 years. At least be consistent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom